Goodness! Did I say something wrong Viviane. I was trying to state my
opinion and not meant to offend you in anyway! Let me unsubscribe and you
can stay on the list...although I am wondering why if you can have freedom
to express your opinion that others can only expressed opinions that you
want to hear !
> ----------
> From: Viviane Lerner[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Reply To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 1999 10:16 AM
> To: STUDIES IN WOMEN AND ENVIRONMENT
> Subject: RE: Society for Human Population Control : as a matter of
> discussion
>
> Hi, everybody,
> It mystifies me to find something like this on a "feminist" list. Forget
> it!
> I find this post extremely offensive and misogynist. Just so you know why
> I'm unsubscribing.
> Best wishes,
> Viviane
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Wong Ee Ling
> > Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 1999 2:57 PM
> > To: STUDIES IN WOMEN AND ENVIRONMENT
> > Subject: RE: Society for Human Population Control : as a matter of
> > discussion
> >
> >
> > Dear Vicki,
> >
> > You asked me why I said that it was a disillusionment? Well, this was
> > what Russell mentioned :
> >
> > > With respect, I ask this in the hope of stimulating discussion:
> > > Isn't it a fairly common thread of ecofeminism to feel that "the
> > > fundamental problem of the human race" is first world (male-dominated/
> > > male-style) exploitation of the third world and the planet in general?
> > > Isn't lobbying congress just going to make them drop a batch of
> condoms
> > > from a helicopter over third world countries they are actively
> grinding
> > > into the dust? Put another way, isn't the solution going to involve a
> > > major paradigm shift that can't really happen through lobbying
> existing
> > > power structures?
> >
> > That is, it seems that the approach of 'lobbying existing power
> > structures'
> > is
> > going to get womenfolk a distorted result so in effect, I agreed with
> him
> > and
> > said "it is a disillusionment" of the way people in power and that would
> > mostly
> > be men, choose to play dumb and misinterpret women's requests for
> greater
> > rights so that they come out with second rated solutions : ) ...zis is
> > exactly
> > what I was trying to say!
> >
> > Anyway, coming from Singapore, I do not really know much about
> > America's women's liberation movement besides what is read and what I
> > now get to read...things like 'color web for women'...etc seems
> > to point to
> > the fact that you people are at the stage of 'Celebration of Women
> > Rights' , rather than the baser need to 'fight' for women rights. The
> > 'space'
> > you all are having, half of the world's women are simply dreaming
> off....
> > In the east, for example, China, the womenfolk are known to be
> quite
> > 'fierce'
> > and a capable woman is seen as one that controls the purse strings of
> her
> > husband (especially in southern China). I suppose it is thanks to MTT
> > (although
> > I am not personally a 'fan' of his) for saying that 'womenfolk
> > holds up half
> > of heaven'
> > (a Chinese saying - makes me wonder which half he is talking about !!).
> > Therefore, apart from the minority vagrant wife beater that we find in
> all
> > cultures,
> > women in China are doing ok. The strange thing is in very
> > 'market-oriented'
> > Hong Kong,
> > just take a look at every film produced, a majority of it gives the
> female
> > star the
> > role of a prostitute or akin to one...
> > The only place that women are not doing ok like in the army are probably
> > places
> > they shouldn't be in the first place! Sorry I ain't want a mother with a
> > machine gun,
> > I might be running to her for affection and get my brains blown off!
> > Women in realpolitik and the business arena ...hmmmm....if I am
> > not mistaken
> > it is perceived that they are usually protrayed as 'bitches',
> > 'prostitutes'
> > ......
> > and that is very sad IF the woman politician or business woman has to
> face
> > all these remarks because she happened to be a woman. Of course, if
> > she does behave like that then one has to dwell deeper to see if the
> > 'culture'
> > in these arenas compelled women to act this way to stay in power or in
> the
> > world
> > of $$$, namely, if they don't play within the rules that men has set
> since
> > they
> > were there first, they don't get to play. Again I suppose this applies
> to
> > those women
> > whom, with sheer effort and intelligence, made it to where they
> > are now....
> > and not by status
> > if they are the daughter of Margaret Thatcher, as an example, or Queen
> > Elizabeth or
> > some nobility, the tables are turned......
> >
> > 'nuf said! Have I occupied too much e-space! For discussion sake. Have
> a
> > nice day!
> >
> > Regards,
> > Eeling
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > ----------
> > > From: vikki charles[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Reply To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 1999 8:00 PM
> > > To: STUDIES IN WOMEN AND ENVIRONMENT
> > > Subject: Re: Society for Human Population Control
> > >
> > > I don't understand why you think it's a disillusionment.
> > > The more people realise what is necessary the better.
> > > On Fri, 3 Dec 1999 21:24:11 +1100 Russell Edwards
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Fri, Dec 03, 1999 at 04:38:15PM +0800, Wong Ee Ling wrote:
> > > > > For some reason Russell makes perfect sense. What a
> > disillusionment.
> > > >
> > > > Why is it a disillusionment?
> > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Eeling @ Zin
> > > > > Singapore
> > > >
> > > > Russell
> > > > (Melbourne)
> > > >
> > >
> > > ----------------------
> > > vikki charles
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> >
> >
>
